Throughout Gavin Newsom’s governorship, he and local officials have been squabbling over financial support and accountability for programs to reduce California’s largest-in-the-nation homelessness crisis.
Newsom has blamed local officials for not clearing streets of squalid encampments, while they have complained that piecemeal state appropriations make it impossible to create effective ongoing programs. With Newsom and legislators in the final throes of fashioning a budget, the exchanges between the governor and local officialdom have become sharper and the differences between county and city officials more obvious.
While homelessness is largely found within cities, particularly large cities, county governments operate most of the medical and social programs to combat the syndrome, leading to conflicts over which local government should be held accountable.
The division among local governments is a statewide problem, but it is most apparent in L.A. County, where a joint city-county homelessness agency is being dismantled amid sharp criticism.
When he unveiled his latest version of the budget this month, Newsom pledged to ramp up pressure on locals by introducing new accountability processes and conditioning aid on identifiable results. He also proposed a model ordinance he said governments could use to clear encampments.
“No one in our nation should be without a place to call home. As we continue to support our communities in addressing homelessness, we expect fast results, not excuses,” he said in a statement. “While we are pleased by the progress many communities have made to address the homelessness crisis, there is more work to do.”
County officials responded combatively, reiterating that year-by-year state support undermines their efforts. They proposed a five-year experiment, dubbed AT HOME, in which multi-year financing would be assured in counties that delineate responsibilities for programs.
The State Association of Counties also released an analysis of nearly $30 billion in state spending on housing and homelessness during Newsom’s governorship that it says failed to be effective.
“For years, the state has thrown one-time money at this problem without any real strategy,” Jeff Griffiths, president of the association, said in a statement. “Our AT HOME proposal is credible, comprehensive, and directly addresses the state-imposed barriers to reducing homelessness.”
The Big City Mayors coalition adopted a more conciliatory response, releasing an “accountability update” to highlight what it said had been successful uses of grants and asking Newsom and legislators to renew them.
“I’ve seen firsthand how our cities use (homeless) funds effectively to address homelessness,” the coalition’s chair, Riverside Mayor Patricia Lock Dawson, said in a statement. “In Riverside, we’ve reached functional zero for youth homelessness — ensuring every young person aged 18 to 24 has a path off the street. With 94 permanent supportive housing units in the pipeline for vulnerable populations like veterans and individuals with disabilities, we know that real progress is possible.”
The blame game is likely to escalate. When the history of California’s homelessness crisis is written, who will be held accountable for the eventual outcome, either positive or negative?
Dan Walters’ commentary is distributed by CalMatters, a public interest journalism venture committed to explaining how California’s state Capitol works and why it matters.
